System and methods for the selection, monitoring and compensation of mentors for at-risk people

ABSTRACT

A method for providing incentive to mentors of at-risk mentees is described. The method comprises the steps of determining an at-risk mentee&#39;s behavior and progress in a period of time, determining the mentee&#39;s income and income tax payments during the same period of time, and calculating a financial incentive to the mentee&#39;s mentor, wherein the amount of the financial incentive is calculated based on the mentee&#39;s behavior and/or income tax payment during the period of time.

This application is a Continuation of U.S. application Ser. No.15/266,384, filed on Sep. 15, 2016. The entirety of the aforementionedapplication is incorporated herein by reference.

FIELD

This disclosure is generally related to systems and methods formentoring at-risk people. In particular, this disclosure is related tosystems and methods for improving matching between mentors and mentees,improving the success of relationships between mentors and mentees, andfor providing incentives to mentors.

BACKGROUND

Current mentoring systems operate on a very small scale for a shortperiod of time. Even though current mentoring systems operate on a verysmall scale for a short period of time, the mentoring systems stillprovide a substantial impact on, for example, children from troubledbackgrounds and people who have recently been released from prison.However, in the current mentoring systems, no quantitative method existsfor pairing a potential mentee with a potential mentor with a view tomaximizing a probability of a successful mentor-mentee relationship on along term basis. Additionally, in current mentorship systems, the mentoris not financially compensated for being a successful mentor and haslittle incentive to establish a long term supportive relationship withthe mentee.

Accordingly, there is a need for systems and methods for improving thepairing between mentors and mentees. There is also a need for systemsand methods for financially compensating successful mentors on a longterm basis.

SUMMARY

One aspect of the present application relates to a method for providingmentoring service to at-risk people. The method comprises the steps of:receiving, via a user interface of an application executing on one ormore computer processors, a risk profile concerning an at-risk subject,wherein the risk profile comprises a plurality of risk factors;assigning, via one or more computer processors, a risk point value toeach of the plurality of risk factors based on severity level of thesubject's risk factors and a risk point matrix stored on a memory deviceaccessible by the one or more computer processors, wherein the riskpoint matrix is determined by evaluating a large scale data basereflecting risks of other subjects compared to their later successes orfailures based on various relevant metrics; determining, via theapplication, a total risk point value of the subject via the one or morecomputer processors; and when the total risk point value equals to orexceeds a predetermined threshold value, accepting the at-risk subjectas a mentee candidate. Examples of the risk factors include, but are notlimited to, age, gender, weight, height, job history, history of trafficviolations, alcohol consumption, drug use history, personal medicalhistory, academic performance in school, attendance history at school,extra-curricular activities, gang involvement, personality assessment,probability of dropping out of school, probability of becoming pregnant,probability of gang involvement, probability of committing a crime,probability of using illegal drugs, probability of becoming habituallyunemployed, and probability of returning to prison.

In some embodiments, the method further comprises the steps of:assigning, via the one or more computer processors, a mentor candidateto the at-risk subject, wherein the mentor is selected from a mentorqualification database on a memory device accessible by the one or morecomputer processors; and approving the assigned mentor by an oversightboard.

In some embodiments, the method further comprises the steps of:retrieving, via the one or more computer processors, information abouthow to reduce risks associated with one or more of the plurality of riskfactors from a database stored on a memory device, and electronicallydelivering, via the one or more computer processors, the information tothe oversight board and/or a mentor approved by the oversight board.

In some embodiments, the method further comprises the steps of:receiving, via a user interface of the application, the at-risksubject's progress report after the establishment of a mentor-menteerelationship; comparing, via one or more computer processors, theat-risk subject's progress to at-risk children success odds orex-convict success odds stored on a memory device accessible by the oneor more computer processors; providing, via the one or more computerprocessors, a financial incentive to the mentor based on result of thecomparing step; and maintaining, via the one or more computerprocessors, a mentor incentive database, wherein the mentor incentivedatabase is stored on a tangible medium accessible by the one or morecomputer processors. In some embodiments, the financial incentive isprovided in the form of (1) an income tax credit or a cash payment tothe mentor, wherein the amount of the financial incentive is calculatedbased on the at-risk subject's behavior and/or the at-risk subject'sincome tax payment.

Another aspect of the present application relates to a system forproviding mentoring service to at-risk people. The system comprises oneor more computer processors; and one or more tangible computer readablemedia accessible by the one or more computer processors, wherein the oneor more tangible computer readable media comprise instructions that,when executed by the one or more processors, causing the one or moreprocessors to perform the following functions: receiving, via a userinterface of an application executing on a computer processor, a riskprofile concerning an at-risk subject, wherein the risk profilecomprises a plurality of risk factors; assigning a risk point value toeach of the plurality of risk factors based on severity level of thesubject's risk factors and a risk point matrix stored on one or moretangible computer readable media accessible by the one or more computerprocessors; determining a total risk point value of the subject; andwhen the total risk point value equals to or exceeds a predeterminedthreshold value, accepting the at-risk subject as a mentee candidate. Insome embodiments, the risk point matrix has been determined byevaluating a large scale data base reflecting risks of other subjectscompared to their later successes or failures based on various relevantmetrics.

In some embodiments, the one or more tangible computer readable mediafurther comprise instructions that, when executed by the one or moreprocessors, causes the one or more processors to perform one or more ofthe following steps: assigning a mentor candidate to the at-risksubject, wherein the mentor candidate is selected from a mentorqualification database on a tangible memory device accessible by the oneor more computer processor; retrieving, via the one or more computerprocessors, information about how to reduce risks associated with one ormore of the plurality of risk factors from a database stored on the oneor more tangible memory device; electronically delivering, via thecomputer processors, the information to the oversight board and/or amentor approved by the oversight board; receiving, via a user interfaceof the application, the at-risk subject's progress report after theestablishment of a mentor-mentee relationship; comparing, via the one ormore processors, the at-risk subject's progress to at-risk childrensuccess odds or ex-convict success odds stored on a memory deviceaccessible by the one or more computer processors; providing, via theone or more processors, a financial incentive to the mentor based onresult of the comparing step; and maintaining, via the one or moreprocessors, a mentor incentive database, wherein the mentor incentivedatabase is stored on a tangible memory device accessible by the one ormore processor.

Another aspect of the present application relates to a tangible computerreadable medium. The tangible computer readable medium comprisesinstructions stored thereon for providing mentoring service to at-riskpeople, the instructions when executed by a processor causing theprocessor to perform the steps of: receiving, via a user interface of anapplication executing on the computer processor, a risk profileconcerning an at-risk subject, wherein the risk profile comprises aplurality of risk factors; assigning a risk point value to each of theplurality of risk factors based on severity level of the subject's riskfactors and a risk point matrix stored on one or more tangible computerreadable media accessible by the processor; determining a total riskpoint value of the subject; and when the total risk point value equalsto or exceeds a predetermined threshold value, accepting the at-risksubject as a mentee candidate.

In some embodiments, the tangible computer readable medium furthercomprises instructions when executed by a processor causing theprocessor to perform the steps of: assigning a mentor candidate to theat-risk subject, wherein the mentor candidate is selected from a mentorqualification database on a tangible memory device accessible by theprocessor; retrieving, via the one or more computer processors,information about how to reduce risks associated with one or more of theplurality of risk factors from a database stored on the one or moretangible memory device; and electronically delivering, via the computerprocessors, the information to the oversight board and/or a mentorapproved by the oversight board.

In some embodiments, the tangible computer readable medium furthercomprises instructions that when executed by a processor causes theprocessor to perform the steps of: receiving, via a user interface ofthe application, the at-risk subject's progress report after theestablishment of a mentor-mentee relationship; comparing, via the one ormore processors, the at-risk subject's progress to at-risk childrensuccess odds or ex-convict success odds stored on a memory deviceaccessible by the one or more computer processors; providing, via theone or more processors, a financial incentive to the mentor based onresult of the comparing step; and maintaining, via the one or moreprocessors, a mentor incentive database, wherein the mentor incentivedatabase is stored on a tangible memory device accessible by the one ormore processors.

Another aspect of the present application relates to a computer systemfor providing incentive to mentors of at-risk mentees. The computersystem comprises a computer processor and one or more tangible computerreadable media accessible by the computer processor, wherein the one ormore tangible computer readable media comprise instructions that, whenexecuted by the one or more processors, causes the one or moreprocessors to perform the steps of: determining a mentee's behavior andprogress in a period of time; determining the mentee's income and incometax payments during the same period of time; and calculating a financialincentive to the mentee's mentor, wherein the amount of the financialincentive is calculated based on the mentee's behavior and/or income taxpayment during the period of time using a compensation matrix stored inthe one or more tangible computer readable media.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The present invention can be better understood by reference to thefollowing drawings, wherein like references numerals represent likeelements. The drawings are merely exemplary to illustrate certainfeatures that may be used singularly or in any combination with otherfeatures and the present invention should not be limited to theembodiments shown.

FIG. 1 shows an embodiment of the system of present application

FIG. 2 shows an embodiment of the database structure of the presentapplication.

FIG. 3 is a flow chart showing exemplary steps of the method of thepresent application.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The following detailed description is presented to enable any personskilled in the art to make and use the object of this application. Forpurposes of explanation, specific nomenclature is set forth to provide athorough understanding of the present application. However, it will beapparent to one skilled in the art that these specific details are notrequired to practice the subject of this application. Descriptions ofspecific applications are provided only as representative examples. Thepresent application is not intended to be limited to the embodimentsshown, but is to be accorded the widest possible scope consistent withthe principles and features disclosed herein.

This description is intended to be read in connection with theaccompanying drawings, which are to be considered part of the entirewritten description of this application. The drawing figures are notnecessarily to scale and certain features of the application may beshown exaggerated in scale or in somewhat schematic form in the interestof clarity and conciseness.

As used herein, the term “at-risk” refers to individuals, groups,populations or sub-populations who are considered to have a higherprobability of failing socially, economically, academically or morally.The term may be applied to those who face circumstances that couldjeopardize their ability to complete school, get or retain employment,or avoid criminal activity; such as homelessness, incarceration, teenagepregnancy, serious health issues, domestic violence, transiency, gangactivity, drug use, or other criminal activity or conditions, or it mayrefer to learning disabilities, low test scores, disciplinary problems,grade retentions, or other learning-related factors that have adverseeffects.

As used herein, “recidivism” refers to repeated or habitual relapse intoa behavior such as crime, or the chronic tendency toward repetition ofcriminal or antisocial behavior patterns.

As used herein, the term “mentee” refers to an at-risk individual whoagrees to accept the instruction, guidance, support and encouragement ofan individual tasked with aiding the mentee become a successful memberof society.

As used herein, the term “mentor” refers to an individual who providesinstruction, guidance, support and encouragement to a mentee for thepurpose of aiding the mentee become a successful member of society.

One basic premise that lies behind the present disclosure is that“Success breeds success.” Individuals who have exposure to, and guidancefrom, persons who are successful have a greater chance of becomingsuccessful themselves. Individuals who lack successful role models intheir lives experience a greater likelihood of failure or recidivism.Accordingly, the present application seeks to link at-risk children andadults with mentors who will have a lifelong economic motivation toensure their success. The mentors would be compensated based on thefuture success of their mentees, such as with some fraction of theincome tax payments by their mentees or some other metric reflective oftheir success as productive citizens. In this manner, the mentors willhave a strong ongoing multi-year motivation to advise, coach, implore,train, and otherwise influence the success of their mentees. They wouldwant them to get educated, avoid crime and drug use, and would even bemotivated to help them get good jobs. They would be interested inmaximizing their long term success. They may share their wisdom, oroffer them jobs, or recommend them for certain positions oropportunities. The same principles can be applied to prisoners who haveserved their time. For such mentors, the economic incentive could bebased on income tax payments by their mentees over some extended numberof years or it could also include a bonus for each day or week or monthor year of crime free activity by their mentees.

Based on the success of various social and charity programs that lackany type of long term economic incentive, applicant has come to theconclusion that a properly constructed large scale effort couldradically improve the success rate of at-risk people of all ages, whileimproving race relations and reducing crime, welfare expenses, and thenational debt.

One aspect of the present application relates to a method for providingmentoring service to at-risk people. The method comprises the steps of:receiving, via a user interface of an application executing on one ormore computer processors, a risk profile concerning an at-risk subject,wherein the risk profile comprises a plurality of risk factors;assigning, via one or more computer processors, a risk point value toeach of the plurality of risk factors based on severity level of thesubject's risk factors and a risk point matrix stored on a memory deviceaccessible by the one or more computer processors; determining, via theapplication, a total risk point value of the subject via the one or morecomputer processors; and when the total risk point value equals to orexceeds a predetermined threshold value, accepting the at-risk subjectas a mentee candidate. Examples of the risk factors include, but are notlimited to, age, gender, weight, height, job history, history of trafficviolations, alcohol consumption, drug use history, personal medicalhistory, academic performance in school, attendance history at school,extra-curricular activities, gang involvement, personality assessment,probability of dropping out of school, probability of becoming pregnant,probability of gang involvement, probability of committing a crime,probability of using illegal drugs, probability of becoming habituallyunemployed, and probability of returning to prison.

In some embodiments, the method further comprises the steps of:assigning, via the one or more computer processors, a mentor candidateto the at-risk subject, wherein the mentor is selected from a mentorqualification database on a memory device accessible by the one or morecomputer processors; and approving the assigned mentor by an oversightboard.

In some embodiments, the method further comprises the steps of:retrieving, via the one or more computer processors, information abouthow to reduce risks associated with one or more of the plurality of riskfactors from a database stored on a memory device, and electronicallydelivering, via the one or more computer processors, the information tothe oversight board and/or a mentor approved by the oversight board.

In some embodiments, the method further comprises the steps of:receiving, via a user interface of the application, the at-risksubject's progress report after the establishment of a mentor-menteerelationship; comparing, via one or more computer processors, theat-risk subject's progress to at-risk children success odds orex-convict success odds stored on a memory device accessible by the oneor more computer processors; providing, via the one or more computerprocessors, a financial incentive to the mentor based on result of thecomparing step; and maintaining, via the one or more computerprocessors, a mentor incentive database, wherein the mentor incentivedatabase is stored on a tangible medium accessible by the one or morecomputer processors. In some embodiments, the financial incentivecalculation is subject to review by an oversight board so that, ifnecessary, adjustments can be made for mentees who do not attractappropriate mentors on a timely basis. The oversight board reviewensures that all relevant factors are considered to balance supply anddemand at a particular point in time within a specific geography formentors and mentees.

In some embodiments, the financial incentive is provided in the form of(1) an income tax credit or a cash payment to the mentor, wherein theamount of the financial incentive is calculated based on the at-risksubject's behavior and/or the at-risk subject's income tax payment.

The cash payment or share of the at-risk subject's income tax payment tobe provided to the mentor may reflect the initial estimates of the risklevel faced by the mentee as determined by comparing the mentee's riskfactors to those of the historical data base accumulated in the computersystem and assessing the likely future performance of the mentee basedon those relative risk comparisons. The potential costs of crime,prison, welfare, and other bad events for some people with those riskfactors will need to be balanced against the positive impact of thosewho succeed despite the risk factors. Depending on how severe the riskfactors may be, the share of the future income tax payments could bevery high while still providing a long term benefit for society if thementor is successful.

Another aspect of the present application relates to a system forproviding mentoring service to at-risk people. The system comprises oneor more computer processors; and one or more tangible computer readablemedia accessible by the one or more computer processors, wherein the oneor more tangible computer readable media comprise instructions that,when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or moreprocessors to perform the following functions: receiving, via a userinterface of an application executing on a computer processor, a riskprofile concerning an at-risk subject, wherein the risk profilecomprises a plurality of risk factors; assigning a risk point value toeach of the plurality of risk factors based on severity level of thesubject's risk factors and a risk point matrix stored on one or moretangible computer readable media accessible by the one or more computerprocessors; determining a total risk point value of the subject; andwhen the total risk point value equals to or exceeds a predeterminedthreshold value, accepting the at-risk subject as a mentee candidate.

In some embodiments, the one or more tangible computer readable mediafurther comprise instructions that, when executed by the one or moreprocessors, cause the one or more processors to perform one or more ofthe following steps: assigning a mentor candidate to the at-risksubject, wherein the mentor candidate is selected from a mentorqualification database on a tangible memory device accessible by the oneor more computer processor; retrieving, via the one or more computerprocessors, information about how to reduce risks associated with one ormore of the plurality of risk factors from a database stored on the oneor more tangible memory device; electronically delivering, via thecomputer processors, the information to the oversight board and/or amentor approved by the oversight board; receiving, via a user interfaceof the application, the at-risk subject's progress report after theestablishment of a mentor-mentee relationship; comparing, via the one ormore processors, the at-risk subject's progress to at-risk childrensuccess odds or ex-convict success odds stored on a memory deviceaccessible by the one or more computer processors; providing, via theone or more processors, a financial incentive to the mentor based onresult of the comparing step; and maintaining, via the one or moreprocessors, a mentor incentive database, wherein the mentor incentivedatabase is stored on a tangible memory device accessible by the one ormore processor.

Another aspect of the present application relates to a tangible computerreadable medium. The tangible computer readable medium comprisesinstructions stored thereon for providing mentoring service to at-riskpeople, the instructions when executed by a processor causing theprocessor to perform the steps of: receiving, via a user interface of anapplication executing on the computer processor, a risk profileconcerning an at-risk subject, wherein the risk profile comprises aplurality of risk factors; assigning a risk point value to each of theplurality of risk factors based on severity level of the subject's riskfactors and a risk point stored on one or more tangible computerreadable media accessible by the processor; determining a total riskpoint value of the subject; and when the total risk point value equalsto or exceeds a predetermined threshold value, accepting the at-risksubject as a mentee candidate. In some embodiments, the risk pointmatrix has been determined by evaluating a large scale data basereflecting risks of other subjects compared to their later successes orfailures based on various relevant metrics.

In some embodiments, the tangible computer readable medium furthercomprises instructions when executed by a processor causing theprocessor to perform the steps of: assigning a mentor candidate to theat-risk subject, wherein the mentor candidate is selected from a mentorqualification database on a tangible memory device accessible by theprocessor; retrieving, via the one or more computer processors,information about how to reduce risks associated with one or more of theplurality of risk factors from a database stored on the one or moretangible memory device; and electronically delivering, via the computerprocessors, the information to the oversight board and/or a mentorapproved by the oversight board.

In some embodiments, the tangible computer readable medium furthercomprises instructions when executed by a processor causing theprocessor to perform the steps of: receiving, via a user interface ofthe application, the at-risk subject's progress reports after theestablishment of a mentor-mentee relationship; comparing, via the one ormore processors, the at-risk subject's progress to at-risk childrensuccess odds or ex-convict success odds stored on a memory deviceaccessible by the one or more computer processors; providing, via theone or more processors, a financial incentive to the mentor based onresult of the comparing step; and maintaining, via the one or moreprocessors, a mentor incentive database, wherein the mentor incentivedatabase is stored on a tangible memory device accessible by the one ormore processor.

Another aspect of the present application relates to a computer systemfor providing incentive to mentors of at-risk mentees. The computersystem comprises a computer processor and one or more tangible computerreadable media accessible by the computer processor, wherein the one ormore tangible computer readable media comprise instructions that, whenexecuted by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processorsto perform the steps of: determining a mentee's behavior and progress ina period of time; determining the mentee's income and income taxpayments during the same period of time; and calculating a financialincentive to the mentee's mentor, wherein the amount of the financialincentive is calculated based on the mentee's behavior and/or income taxpayment during the period of time using a compensation matrix stored inthe one or more tangible computer readable media.

In some embodiments, the tangible computer readable medium comprisesinstructions stored thereon for selecting mentors and/or mentees basedon selection factors including in the case of mentors, their relativecareer and lifetime success, their emotional maturity, their job andfamily status, their ability and willingness to dedicate the timenecessary to be a successful mentor, among other factors, and in thecase of mentees, their age, family situation, school performance, schoolattendance, school dropout rates, gang involvement or temptations, druguse, criminal activity, and maturity, among other factors.

In some embodiments, the tangible computer readable medium comprisesinstructions when executed by a processor causing the processor to: (1)receive a selection profile concerning a potential mentor or menteecandidate, wherein the selection profile comprises a plurality ofselection factors, qualifications of the mentor and/or risks faced bythe mentee; (2) assign a selection point value to the potentialcandidate based on the qualifications of the mentor or the severitylevel of the potential mentee candidate's risks and the risk pointmatrix stored in the memory device, wherein better scores are higherscores; (3) assign additional selection point values to the subjectbased on other selection factors in the potential candidate's selectionprofile, wherein better scores are higher scores; (4) determine a totalselection point value of the potential candidate; and (5a) if the totalcandidate point value is equal to or exceeds a predetermined thresholdvalue, accept the potential candidate as a mentor or mentee candidate,or (5b) if the total risk point value is below the predeterminedthreshold, reject the potential candidate as a mentor or menteecandidate. In some embodiments, the rating system in steps (2) and (3)are designed in such a way that better scores are lower scores,including negative scores, and the potential candidate is accepted as amentor or mentee candidate if the total candidate point value is equalto or below a predetermined threshold value in step (5a), or is rejectedas a mentor or mentee candidate if the total candidate point valueexceed a predetermined threshold value in step (5b).

In some embodiments, the tangible computer readable medium storessocietal costs associated with children who “fail” to become productive.Examples of such costs include, but are not limited to, the costs ofprison, welfare, crime, drug use, lack of income tax payments, teenagepregnancy, failing to graduate from high school, and a risk pointmatrix. In some embodiments, the tangible computer readable mediumcomprises instructions when executed by a processor causing theprocessor to: (1) receive a risk profile concerning the mentee subject,wherein the risk profile comprises a plurality of risk factors includingthe severity level of the subject's probability of dropping out ofschool or failing in a variety of other ways that will be expensive tosociety in terms of actual dollars and/or opportunity costs compared towhat the mentee might achieve with appropriate guidance; (2) evaluatethe expected value of the mentee's life, from society's point of viewand compare it to what might be achieved with appropriate guidance; (3)recommend a compensation factor to be assigned to the mentee's mentorthat will provide a strong incentive to the mentor while allowingsociety to retain a significant benefit as well; and (4) recommend ashare of the income taxes that will be paid by the mentee and that willthen be paid to the mentor by the tax authorities in recognition ofmentor's role in ensuring the mentee's success.

In some embodiments, the one or more tangible computer readable mediastore income and income tax data regarding the mentee and/or thementee's family in order to: (1) provide a basis for payments to mentorsas compensation for their services; (2) provide a periodic basis foranalysis of mentee's productivity and success relative to the SuccessOdds analysis originally projected based on the mentee's risk assessmentprior to becoming a mentee; and (3) provide a basis for analysis ofmentor's productivity and success relative to the Success Odds analysisoriginally projected based on the mentee's risk assessment prior tobecoming a mentee.

In some embodiments, the tangible computer readable media storesrecidivism rates for ex-convicts and compares them to recidivism ratesfor ex-convicts who become mentees and keeps track of mentor actionsdesigned to help their mentees become successful and keeps track ofmentee income and income tax payments in order to: (1) provide a basisfor payments to mentors whose mentees avoid future crimes and futureprison sentences; (2) provide a basis for determining which mentoractions and strategies are most successful for which types of mentees;(3) provide a basis for determining which mentor qualities and/orqualifications are most helpful for which types of mentees; (4) assignpayments to mentors reflecting the time period the mentees have avoidedcriminal behavior and/or the income tax payments made by the mentees;(5) provide an ongoing database which can be analyzed in order to assignfuture mentor compensation rates based on the success of the mentoringprogram; and (6) provide a basis for analyzing the overall costs ofrecidivism, in terms of court costs, prison costs, and society's costsdue to the crimes being committed. The higher amounts of income tax paidby ex-convicts who become mentees may be only a small fraction of theoverall benefit to society that is achieved with this program.

FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating exemplary hardware componentsthat may be used for implementing aspects of the systems and methods forusing incentives to motivate mentoring activities for at-risk people. Acomputer system 100 may include and execute programs to performfunctions described herein, including steps of method described above.While only one processor 114 is shown in FIG. 1, it is understood thatthe computer system 100 may include multiple processors. Additionally,the system 100 may include multiple networked computers. Further, amobile device that includes some of the same components of computersystem 100 may perform steps of the method described above. Computersystem 100 may connect with a network 118, e.g., Internet, or othernetwork, to receive inquires, obtain data, and transmit information(e.g., to a user work station or other user computing device) asdescribed above.

Computer system 100 typically includes a memory 102, a secondary storagedevice 112, and a processor 114. Computer system 100 may also include aplurality of processors 114 and be configured as a plurality of, e.g.,bladed servers, or other known server configurations. Computer system100 may also include an input device 116, a display device 110, and anoutput device 108.

Memory 102 may include RAM or similar types of memory, and it may storeone or more applications for execution by processor 114. Secondarystorage device 112 may include a hard disk drive, floppy disk drive,CD-ROM drive, or other types of non-volatile data storage. Processor 114may include multiple processors or include one or more multi-coreprocessors. Any type of processor 114 capable of performing thecalculations described herein may be used. Processor 114 may execute theapplication(s) that are stored in memory 102 or secondary storage 112,or received from the Internet or other network 118. The processing byprocessor 114 may be implemented in software, such as software modules,for execution by computers or other machines. These applicationspreferably include instructions executable to perform the functions andmethods described above and illustrated in the Figures herein. Theapplications may provide graphic user interfaces (GUIs) through whichusers may view and interact with the application(s).

Also, as noted, processor 114 may execute one or more softwareapplications in order to provide the functions described in thisspecification, specifically to execute and perform the steps andfunctions in the methods described above. Such methods and theprocessing may be implemented in software, such as software modules, forexecution by computers or other machines.

Input device 116 may include any device for entering information intocomputer system 100, such as a touch-screen, keyboard, mouse,cursor-control device, microphone, digital camera, video recorder orcamcorder. Input device 116 may be used to enter information into GUIsduring performance of the methods described above. Display device 110may include any type of device for presenting visual information suchas, for example, a computer monitor or flat-screen display (or mobiledevice screen). Output device 108 may include any type of device forpresenting a hard copy of information, such as a printer, and othertypes of output devices include speakers or any device for providinginformation in audio form.

Examples of computer system 100 include dedicated server computers, suchas bladed servers, personal computers, laptop computers, notebookcomputers, palm top computers, network computers, mobile devices, or anyprocessor-controlled device capable of executing a web browser or othertype of application for interacting with the system. If computer system100 is a server, server 100 may not include input device 116, displaydevice 110 and output device 108. Rather, server 100 may be connected,e.g., through a network connection to a stand-alone work station(another computer system) that has such devices.

Although only one computer system 100 is shown in detail, the computersystem 100 may use multiple computer systems or servers as necessary ordesired to support the users, as described above. Aspects may also useback-up or redundant servers to prevent network downtime in the event ofa failure of a particular server. In addition, although computer system100 is depicted with various components, one skilled in the art willappreciate that the server can contain additional or differentcomponents. In addition, although aspects of an implementationconsistent with the above are described as being stored in memory, oneskilled in the art will appreciate that these aspects can also be storedon or read from other types of computer program products orcomputer-readable media, such as secondary storage devices, includinghard disks, floppy disks, or CD-ROM; or other forms of RAM or ROM.Computer-readable media may include instructions for controlling acomputer system, such as the computer system 100, to perform aparticular method, such as methods described above.

FIG. 2 shows a plurality of databases (DB) that may be stored in eithermemory 102, secondary storage 112, or a combination of memory 102 andsecondary storage 112. For purposes of description only, thisdescription will assume that the plurality of databases are stored onthe secondary storage 112. The plurality of database may include anysuitable database, such as a document-oriented database, a full-textdatabase, a spatial database, a distributed database, and a relationaldatabase. One of ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize thatother types of databases may be used.

Children's Success Odds Database

In one aspect of this disclosure, a first database may be a childrensuccess odds DB 202. The children success odds DB 202 may store aplurality of children's records. The children success odds DB 202 may beused to store various attributes or characteristics about each child andhis or her life situation stored in DB 202. The various storedattributes or characteristics may comprise a risk profile for each childstored in the children success odds DB 202. For example, the childrensuccess odds DB 202 may include attributes or characteristics such asthe child's IQ (intelligence quotient), the child's prior success inschool (attendance rates, grades, teacher assessments, disciplineproblems, etc.), the child's family income, the neighborhood or ZIP codeof where the child lives, the school the child attends, the dropout rateof the school the child attends, the family status of the child'sfamily, the success of the child's siblings, the child's neighborhood'scrime rates, the child's neighborhood's gang activity, and the child'sneighborhood's drug use. In some embodiments, the Success Odds (SO) iscalculated based on the following formula:

SO=f(a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,I,j)=Aa+Bb+Cc+Dd+Ee+Ff+Gg+Hh++Jj+Kk+Ll

wherein a=IQ, b=family income, c=neighborhood assessment, d=schoolassessment, e=family status, f=sibling success, g=crime rate, h=localdrug use, i=dropout rate, j=school success, k=neighborhood gangactivity, l=other factors, and wherein the weight of each contributingfactor may be modified by a modifying factor (e.g., A, B, C, D, E, F, G,H, I, J, K, or L).

One of ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize that otherattributes or characteristics may be stored in the children success oddsDB 202. Based on these attributes or characteristics, the system 100 maygenerate a risk point value for each child using a probability ofvarious life events. For purposes of description only, the remainder ofthis disclosure will assume that the higher the risk point value, themore likely the child is at-risk. In another aspect of this disclosurethe risk point value is defined in such a manner that, the lower therisk point value, the more likely the child is, at-risk. For example,the various life events may include graduating from high school,graduating from college, becoming a contributing member of society,future drug use, future criminal conviction, future unemployment, futurewelfare assistance, or future premature death. One of ordinary skill inthe art would readily recognize that other life events may be calculatedusing the attributes or characteristics about each child stored in thechildren success odds DB 202. To generate the risk point value for eachchild, the system 100 may assign a certain number of points for each ofthe life events described above. The system 100 may then simply add allof the points to generate the risk point value. Alternatively, thesystem 100 may assign a weighting factor to each of the life events. Thesystem 100 may then generate the risk point value using weightingfactors and the points for each life event described above. Likewise,there may be attributes which correlate in a way that affects the risksfor some children. In this case, for example, a child whose siblings alldid well may not be affected by gang activity or drug use in theneighborhood; however, if siblings were susceptible to such dangers,then the weight of these risks would be magnified. So the simplisticformula above may become more complicated as analysis of the availabledata demonstrates interrelationships of risk factor that need to beevaluated by the computer system.

In another aspect of this disclosure, the system 100 may add to the riskpoint value that was calculated based on the life events describedabove. For example, the system 100 may factor the sex, the gender, thechild's non-academic interests, the section of the country in which thechild lives, and the child's overall appearance. One of ordinary skillin the art would readily recognize that other non-life events may befactored in by the system 100. A certain number of risk points may beassigned to these non-life events. These risk points may then be addedto the risk points based on life events. Alternatively, these riskpoints may also be weighted and then added to the risk points based onlife events.

Ex-Convict's Success Odds Database

In one aspect of this disclosure, a second database may be an ex-convictsuccess odds DB 204. The ex-convict success odds DB 204 may functionsimilarly to the children success odds DB 202 as described above withthe exception that the DB is for ex-convicts rather than children. Theex-convict success odds DB 204 may be used to store various attributesor characteristics about each ex-convict stored in the DB 204. Thevarious stored attributes or characteristics may comprise a risk profilefor each ex-convict stored in the ex-convict success odds DB 204. Forexample, the ex-convict success odds DB 204 may include attributes orcharacteristics such as the ex-convict's committed crime, the number ofyears in prison, the ex-convict's education level, the ex-convict'sworkplace skills, the ex-convict's family support system, theex-convict's personality, which may be assessed by a trainedprofessional, the ex-convict's drug use history, the ex-convict's ganginvolvement history, and other factors that may be used by evaluatinghistorical recidivism data. Based on these attributes orcharacteristics, the system 100 may generate a risk point value for eachex-convict. For purposes of description only, the remainder of thisdisclosure will assume that the higher the risk point value, the morelikely the ex-convict is at-risk. In another aspect of this disclosurethe risk point value is defined in such a manner that, the lower therisk point value, the more likely the ex-convict is, at-risk. One ofordinary skill in the art would readily recognize that other attributesor characteristics may be stored in the ex-convict success odds DB 204.To generate the risk point value for each ex-convict, the system 100 mayassign a certain number of points for each of the attributes orcharacteristics described above. The system 100 may then simply add allof the points to generate the risk point value. Alternatively, thesystem 100 may assign a weighting factor each of the attributes orcharacteristics. The system 100 may then generate the risk point valueusing weighting factors and the points for each attribute orcharacteristic described above.

In some embodiments, the prospects of ex-convicts (SO_(ExCon)) areevaluated based on the following formula:

(SO _(ExCon))=f(a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,i)=Aa+Bb+Cc+Dd+Ee+Ff+Gg+Hh+Ii

Wherein a=crime committed, b=years in prison, c=education, d=workplaceskills, e=family support system, f=personality assessment by a trainedprofessional, g=drug use history, h=gang involvement history, i=otherfactors found by evaluating historical recidivism data, and wherein theweight of each contributing factor may be modified by a modifying factor(e.g., A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H or I). As with the formula for children,the equation above may need to be significantly more complicated if itis determined that various factors are interrelated in their effects.

If the Success Odds are below a certain level, then clearly interventionby a mentor could be very valuable. As the mentor-mentee relationshipcontinues, data could also be collected regarding the impact of mentorson various “types” of at-risk children, for example the impact ofmentoring on children with Success Odds of 20-30% vs. the impact ofmentoring on children with Success Odds of 0-10%. In some embodiments,the amount of mentor incentive varies depending on the magnitude of thechallenge that the mentor will face in helping his or her mentee tosucceed. In some embodiments, mentors are assigned to mentees of thesame gender. In some embodiments, mentors are assigned to mentees ofdifferent gender. In some embodiments, mentors are assigned to menteesof the same ethnicity. In other embodiments, mentors are assigned tomentees of different ethnicity. Other factors to be considered formentor/mentee pairing include regularity of interaction, geographicdistance, the family situation of the mentor, the job status of thementor, etc. In some embodiments, the system analyzes periodically thepast mentor/mentee pairing data and results and determines what seems tobe working and what seems to be failing. The knowledge accumulated inthe analysis is used to improve future pairings as well as to advisecurrent mentors and mentees about which behavior characteristic theyshould consider employing for best results.

The risk of recidivism for ex-convicts can be calculated in a waysimilar to the Success Odds of young children. In some embodiments, thementor-mentee relationship is established with an in-prison mentor whilean ex-con mentee is in prison and the mentoring continues with anoutside mentor after the mentee is released from the prison. In someembodiments, the in-prison mentor is selected from people who work inprison and the outside mentor is selected from people who work outsideof prison. In some embodiments, the in-prison mentors are paid based onthe recidivism rates of the ex-con mentees and the outside mentors arepaid based on the ex-con mentees' income tax payments.

Mentors' Databases

In one aspect of this disclosure, a third database may be the mentors'DB 206. The mentors' DB 206 may be comprised of a plurality database.The mentors' DB may be comprised of, for example, a mentor'squalifications DB 208, a mentor's performances DB 210, and a mentor'sincentives DB 212. One of ordinary skill in the art would readilyrecognize that more or fewer databases may be used.

The mentors' qualifications DB 208 may be used to store a plurality ofmentor records. For example, the mentors' qualifications DB 208 maystore various attributes or characteristics about each mentor stored inDB 208. For example, the mentors' qualifications DB 206 may includeattributes or characteristics such as each mentor's education,profession, criminal history, health history, drug use history,leadership roles or positions, family status, or any other attributes orcharacteristics that may be helpful in being a successful mentor. Amentor profile may be generated for each mentor using these attributesor characteristics. One of ordinary skill in the art would readilyrecognize that other attributes or characteristics may be used whengenerating the mentor profiles. There may also be “free-form” entries,such as leadership positions held within the mentor's community orletters of recommendations or references provided by the mentorattesting to, for example, the mentor's character. The mentors'qualifications may be periodically updated to account for, for example,new references or leadership positions. Longer term, each mentor's trackrecord of success or failure with his or her mentees will also be animportant factor in judging the mentor's qualifications in the future.

The mentors' qualifications DB 208 may also store potentiallydisqualifying attributes or characteristics. For example, if a potentialmentor volunteers for the system 100, then the potential mentor may beadded to the mentor DB 206. However, if it is later found out that thepotential mentor is, for example, an alcoholic, a drug user, a criminalor a child molester, the potential mentor would then be disqualified.

In addition to qualifications, the mentors' qualifications DB 208 mayalso include suitability measures for a given mentor-mentee pair. Forexample, before a mentor is assigned to a mentee, the mentee and mentormay audition each other for, for example, compatibility. The mentors'qualifications DB 208 and the mentee′ success odds DB 202 may also storethe results of such an audition. Moreover, the mentee may reject amentor after a mentor-mentee relationship has been established. In sucha case, the mentors' qualifications DB 208 may include a note indicatingthat the mentor is not suitable for the mentee. Depending on thecontents of that note, the mentor may not be considered suitable for anyfuture mentee. Depending on the timing of that note, the mentor's rightto any future payments may be eliminated or adjusted.

The mentors' performances DB 210 may also be used to store a pluralityof mentor records. For example, the mentors' performances DB 210 maystore records related to how well the mentors are performing. One way toassess how well the mentors are performing is by comparing results ofthe mentees to the children's success odds or the ex-convicts' successodds. The greater the children or ex-convicts are succeeding compared tothe respective success odds, the better the mentors are performing.Another way the system 100 may assess how well the mentors areperforming is by including reports from various parties. For example,the mentee's parents, teachers, or other interested parties may providereports discussing how well the mentor is having an impact on thementee. One of ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize thatother performance metrics may be used to determine the efficacy of thementor. The performance metrics may be collected periodically. In someembodiments, various alerts are provided by the system if results aresignificantly positive or negative so that appropriate action can betaken to either duplicate or eliminate the behavior reported.

Additionally, the mentors' performances DB 210 may include a pluralityof problem-solution pairs. For example, if a mentor reports that acertain solution worked well for a mentee in a given situation, this maybe noted in the mentors' performances DB 210. Alternatively, if a mentorreports that a certain solution did not work well for a mentee in agiven situation, this also may be noted in the mentors' performances DB210. Such problem-solution pairs may be useful for other mentor-menteerelationships.

The system 100 may also include an oversight board to track how well thementors are performing. The board may use the information in thementors' performances DB 210 to perform the tracking. In addition totracking how well the mentors are performing, the board may assign amentor to a mentee. The assignment may take place based on, for example,mentee success odds, mentor qualifications, and mentor performances.Additionally, the board may limit a number of mentees a mentor may have.For example, if a mentor is new and has not yet proven that he is a goodmentor, the board may limit the number of mentees the mentor may have atany given time initially. If the mentor performs well, then the boardmay increase the number of mentees the mentor may have. In any case, itis likely that the allowable number of mentees should grow for eachmentor as the mentor demonstrates success and as mentees perhaps requireless hours per week as they mature and succeed with their lives.

In some embodiments, the system 100 may retrieve information about howthe qualifications of potential mentors in general and/or their specificqualifications with respect to mentoring a specific mentee candidate ortype of mentee candidate, and electronically or otherwise deliver theinformation to the oversight board which will be responsible forapproving the assignment of a mentor to the particular mentee. Thesystem 100 may also electronically or otherwise deliver some aspects ofthe mentor information to potential mentees or their parents orguardians and obtain a response from the potential mentees about theirwillingness to work with a particular mentor.

In some embodiments, the system 100 evaluates or provides information tothe oversight board to evaluate the probability that the potentialmentor will be successful in reducing the various risk factorsassociated with one or more potential mentees. Factors to be analyzedwill include their education, job, criminal history, health, drug use,leadership, or other personality trait track records. Their position inthe community and references from respectable people testifying to thequalifications of the mentors could also be important. By trackingmentors' qualifications and personal and professional attributescompared to their performance over time, the data will become availableto provide future guidance about which potential mentors would be mosteffective. Correlating these results with the attributes of theirrespective mentees could also be productive. The best mentor for personX might be far different than the best mentor for person Y.

In some embodiments, the system 100 electronically tracks mentors'performance in guiding their mentees. These could include statisticsabout the success of the mentees relative to their initial Success Oddsand could include reports from the mentees and/or their parents orteachers or other interested parties. Whether data should be collectedweekly or monthly or in some other periodic fashion will also beinfluenced by an ongoing analysis of the data. Higher frequency early inthe relationship will certainly make sense, but the time interval may beextended based on stable positive relationships and progress. Of course,learning both the good and the bad aspects of each relationship can beequally important. In some cases, even the mentors may need mentors ifparticularly challenging situations arise. Having a large scale databasethat addresses a wide range of possible problems and solutions will becritical in order to get the best results for each mentee on a timelybasis. Having a specific database for each mentee will also be importantin order to ensure appropriate progress is being made and in order toalert authorities if mentor or mentee behavior appears to beinappropriate or unsuccessful in any way or evidence suggests that thecurrent mentor/mentee relationship needs to be terminated or modified insome way.

In some embodiments, the system 100 electronically tracks the overallresults of the mentoring process. When launched on a massive scale,eventually some number of child molesters or criminals or simplyineffective mentors will find their way into the system. It is importantthat a database and/or emergency information system be constructed sothat any improper behavior can be instantly reported and dealt witheffectively. In some embodiments, the contracts signed with mentorsinclude clauses that eliminate their right to future payments ifimproper behavior occurs. Likewise, mentees will need the right toaudition mentors and/or reject them down the road if they are notcomfortable that the relationship is productive for them. Keeping acareful database of mentor candidates that includes reports of theirsuccess and failures will be critical to ensure that mentees are bothprotected and given the best odds of future success. The database wouldneed to cover the entire nation or perhaps the world to ensure that “badapples” identified in one jurisdiction do not later take root inanother. Likewise, it will no doubt be true that some mentors willdevelop spectacular ideas that should be quickly copied across the land.Collecting and sharing the bad and the good stories from this databasewill be extremely valuable.

The mentors' incentives DB 212 may be used to store a plurality ofmentor records. The mentor records stored in the mentors' qualificationsDB 208, the mentors' performances DB 210, and the mentors' incentives DB212 may all be identical. The system 100 may incentivize mentors fortheir efforts. For example, the mentor may receive a portion of hismentee's tax payments. In this way, the mentor and even the mentor'sfamily and friends may be incentivized to maximize the financialwell-being of his mentee. There may be some adjustments to thisincentive, however. For example, women generally have lower incomes thanmen. Accordingly, there may be an adjustment factor to correct for suchincome inequalities. Alternatively, or additionally, the mentor may becompensated based on the mentee's household tax payments. For example,the mentee could be woman who becomes a successful but non-workingmother. The mentor may have had a large part to play in that success.However, since the woman is non-working, she does not generate anytaxable income. Therefore, sharing in the tax payments based onhousehold income may be a way to appropriately compensate the mentor.

The system 100 may also provide for additional bonuses. These additionalbonuses may be based, for example, on specific goals, such as graduatingfrom high school, achieving a specific grade point average, gainingacceptance at a college, avoiding teen pregnancy, drug use, gangactivity, or crime. Such goals may not result in any taxable income.Therefore, one way to compensate the mentor may be a tax deduction. Thetax deduction may depend on how well the mentee is doing in regard tothe specific goal. This could be, for example, a deduction on their owntax bills upon their mentee reaching a certain age without havingsuccumbed to any of these temptations or for having achieved some ofthese goals. A database would have to be constructed that tracked theperformance of the mentees on these and other key factors.

Additionally, a convict who is about to be released from prison or anex-convict who has already been released from prison may have multiplementors, such as two. For example, one mentor may be inside the prisonand another mentor may be outside the prison. The two mentors may becompensated differently. For example, the mentor inside the prison maybe compensated based on the mentee's recidivism. The mentor outside theprison may be compensated based on the mentee's income tax payments.

The initial database describing the Success Odds and the mentor share offuture payments will be very important in focusing the work whileproperly motivating the mentors. It will, however, be equally importantto continue to track both the mentees and the mentors in order todetermine the success of the relationship and, if possible, the keyelements of the success or lack thereof. Any particular mentor may lookgood on paper, but only time and the database will be able to determinethe true efficacy of his or her activities. Both future mentors andmentees may have an opportunity to learn from the success and failuresof their predecessors if they are captured properly in the computersystem and analyzed carefully.

Mentee Safety and Program Oversight

It will be crucial to ensure that vigilant oversight of this process isin place. When launched on a massive scale, care must be taken to dealwith the fact that child molesters, criminals or simply ineffectivementors may find their way into the system. Accordingly, in someembodiments, a database and/or emergency information system will beconstructed so that any improper behavior can be instantly reported anddealt with effectively. The contracts signed with mentors may includeclauses that eliminate their right to future payments if improperbehavior occurs. Likewise, mentees will need the right to auditionmentors and/or reject them down the road if they are not comfortablethat the relationship is appropriate or productive for them. Keeping acareful database of mentor candidates that includes reports of theirsuccess and failures will be critical to ensure that mentees are bothprotected and given the best odds of future success. In someembodiments, the database would be a nationwide database to ensure that“bad apples” identified in one jurisdiction do not later take root inanother. Likewise, it will no doubt be true that some mentors willdevelop spectacular ideas that should be quickly copied across the land.Collecting and sharing the bad and the good stories from this databasewill both be extremely valuable.

In some embodiments, another associated database can track the overallmentor review process. An oversight entity may oversee the mentors'behavior and approve each assignment and review the success of theassignment on an ongoing basis. One can imagine various types ofmisbehavior that could take place in this sort of bureaucracy, so itwill be important to track various metrics to ensure the best possibleresults while encouraging whistle blowers or contrary points of viewthat may, upon inspection, have great merit. Having an extensivedatabase that is carefully mined on a regular basis will help to ensurethat the process gets the best results. Keeping track of drug use,crime, employment rates, graduation rates, dropout rates, teenpregnancy, and other measures of success and failure will be importantin assessing the ongoing qualifications of the various mentors. Perhapsinitially any mentor should be limited to just 1 or 2 or a few menteesuntil he or she can establish his or her credentials through the successof the mentees.

FIG. 3 is a flowchart showing a method 300 to carry out the system 100,according to one aspect of this disclosure. The method 300 may start atblock 302. At block 302, the system 100 may collect data for mentees andmentors. The collected data may be used to populate the children successodds DB 202, the ex-convict success odds DB 204, and the mentor DB 206,for example. After block 302 is complete, the method 300 may proceed toblock 304.

At block 304, the system 100 may generate success odds for the mentees.The mentees may be, for example, children or ex-convicts. The successodds for the mentees may be calculated as described above in referenceto FIG. 2. After block 304 is complete, the method 300 may proceed toblock 306.

At block 306, the system 100 may generate profiles for the mentors. Thesystem may generate profiles for the mentors using the informationdescribed above in reference to FIG. 2. After block 306 is complete, themethod 300 may proceed to block 308.

At block 308, the system 100 may match the mentors with the mentees. Thematching may be carried out entirely by the system 100, entirely by theoversight board described above, or by a combination of the system andthe oversight board. After block 308 is complete, the method 300 mayproceed to block 310.

At block 310, the system 100 may track the success of each mentor-menteerelationship. The system 100 may track the success of the relationshipsas described above in reference to FIG. 2. After block 310 is complete,the method 300 may proceed to block 312.

At block 312, the system 100 may compensate the mentor based on howsuccessful the mentor-mentee relationship is. The system 100 may gaugethe success of the relationships as described above in reference to FIG.2. After block 312 is complete (which may take years or even decades),the method 300 may end.

In some embodiments, the system 100 will record the key attributes ofthe mentor and mentee and record the key successes and/or failures alongwith any relevant data about specific actions that are perceived to haveaffected this success or failure. In some order to maximize the benefitsof this information, it should be constantly evaluated in order toidentify patterns and/or creative ideas that show abnormal results,whether they are positive or negative. Any such data perceived to beimportant should be shared widely on a national or international basisso that mentees, mentors, and oversight boards can get maximum benefits.

The above description is for the purpose of teaching the person ofordinary skill in the art how to practice the object of the presentapplication, and it is not intended to detail all those obviousmodifications and variations of it which will become apparent to theskilled worker upon reading the description. It is intended, however,that all such obvious modifications and variations be included withinthe scope of the present application, which is defined by the followingclaims. The aspects and embodiments are intended to cover the componentsand steps in any sequence which is effective to meet the objectivesthere intended, unless the context specifically indicates the contrary.

What is claimed is:
 1. A method for providing mentoring service toat-risk people, comprising the steps of: receiving, via a user interfaceof an application executing on one or more computer processors, a riskprofile concerning an at-risk subject, wherein the risk profilecomprises a plurality of risk factors; assigning, via one or morecomputer processors, a risk point value to each of the plurality of riskfactors based on severity level of the subject's risk factors and a riskpoint matrix stored on a memory device accessible by the one or morecomputer processors; determining, via the one or more computerprocessors, a total risk point value of the subject via the one or morecomputer processors; and when the total risk point value equals to orexceeds a predetermined threshold value, accepting the at-risk subjectas a mentee; assigning, via the one or more computer processors, amentor to the mentee, wherein the mentor is selected from a mentorqualification database on a memory device accessible by the one or morecomputer processors; approving the assigned mentor by an oversightboard; receiving, via a user interface of the application, the mentee'sprogress report after the establishment of a mentor-mentee relationship;comparing, via one or more computer processors, the mentee's progress toat-risk population success odds or ex-convict success odds stored on amemory device accessible by the one or more computer processors; andproviding, via the one or more computer processors, a financialincentive to the mentor based on result of the comparing step; whereinthe financial incentive is provided in the form of an income tax creditor a cash payment to the mentor, wherein the amount of the financialincentive is calculated based on the mentee's behavior and the mentee'sincome tax payment.
 2. The method of claim 1, further comprising thestep of: maintaining, via the one or more computer processors, a mentorincentive database, wherein the mentor incentive database is stored on atangible medium accessible by the one or more computer processors. 3.The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of: retrieving, viathe one or more computer processors, information about how to reducerisks associated with one or more of the plurality of risk factors froma database stored on a memory device.
 4. The method of claim 3, furthercomprising the step of: electronically delivering, via the one or morecomputer processors, the information to the oversight board and/or amentor approved by the oversight board.
 5. The method of claim 1,wherein the plurality of risk factors comprise one or more of thefactors selected from the group consisting of age, gender, weight,height, job history, history of traffic violations, alcohol consumption,drug use history, personal medical history, academic performance inschool, attendance history at school, extra-curricular activities, ganginvolvement, personality assessment, probability of dropping out ofschool, probability of becoming pregnant, probability of committing acrime, probability of using illegal drugs, probability of becominghabitually unemployed, and probability of returning to prison.
 6. Themethod of claim 1, wherein the amount of the financial incentive isbased on a share of the at-risk subject's income tax payment, whereinthe size of the share is determined by the severity of the mentee's riskfactors and potential costs of crime, prison and/or welfare to thesociety.
 7. The method of claim 1, wherein the risk point matrix isdetermined by evaluating a large scale data base reflecting risks ofother subjects compared to their later successes or failures based onvarious relevant metrics.
 8. The method of claim 1, wherein the mentee'sbehavior includes the time period the mentee has avoided criminalbehavior.
 9. A system for providing mentoring service to at-risk people,comprising: one or more computer processors; and one or more tangiblecomputer readable media accessible by the one or more computerprocessors, wherein the one or more tangible computer readable mediacomprise instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors,cause the one or more processors to perform: receiving, via a userinterface of an application executing on one or more computerprocessors, a risk profile concerning an at-risk subject, wherein therisk profile comprises a plurality of risk factors; assigning, via oneor more computer processors, a risk point value to each of the pluralityof risk factors based on severity level of the subject's risk factorsand a risk point matrix stored on a memory device accessible by the oneor more computer processors, determining, via the one or more computerprocessors, a total risk point value of the subject via the one or morecomputer processors; and when the total risk point value equals to orexceeds a predetermined threshold value, accepting the at-risk subjectas a mentee; assigning, via the one or more computer processors, amentor to the mentee, wherein the mentor is selected from a mentorqualification database on a memory device accessible by the one or morecomputer processors and is approved by an oversight board; receiving,via a user interface of the application, the mentee's progress reportafter the establishment of a mentor-mentee relationship; comparing, viaone or more computer processors, the mentee's progress to at-riskpopulation success odds or ex-convict success odds stored on a memorydevice accessible by the one or more computer processors; and providing,via the one or more computer processors, a financial incentive to thementor based on result of the comparing step, wherein the financialincentive is provided in the form of an income tax credit or a cashpayment to the mentor, wherein the amount of the financial incentive iscalculated based on the mentee's behavior and the mentee's income taxpayment.
 10. The system of claim 9, wherein the plurality of riskfactors comprise one or more of the factors selected from the groupconsisting of age, gender, weight, height, job history, history oftraffic violations, alcohol consumption, drug use history, personalmedical history, academic performance in school, attendance history atschool, extra-curricular activities, gang involvement, personalityassessment, probability of dropping out of school, probability ofbecoming pregnant, probability of committing a crime, probability ofusing illegal drugs, probability of becoming habitually unemployed, andprobability of returning to prison.
 11. The system of claim 9, whereinthe one or more tangible computer readable media further compriseinstructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, causethe one or more processors to perform: maintaining, via the one or morecomputer processors, a mentor incentive database, wherein the mentorincentive database is stored on a tangible medium accessible by the oneor more computer processors.
 12. The system of claim 9, wherein the oneor more tangible computer readable media further comprise instructionsthat, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or moreprocessors to perform: retrieving, via the one or more computerprocessors, information about how to reduce risks associated with one ormore of the plurality of risk factors from a database stored on a memorydevice.
 13. The system of claim 12, wherein the one or more tangiblecomputer readable media further comprise instructions that, whenexecuted by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processorsto perform: electronically delivering, via the one or more computerprocessors, the information to the oversight board and/or a mentorapproved by the oversight board.
 14. The system of claim 9, wherein therisk point matrix is determined by evaluating a large scale data basereflecting risks of other subjects compared to their later successes orfailures based on various relevant metrics.
 15. The system of claim 9,wherein the amount of the financial incentive is based on a share of thementee's income tax payment, wherein the size of the share is determinedby the severity of the mentee's risk factors and potential costs ofcrime, prison and/or welfare to the society.
 16. The system of claim 9,wherein the mentee's behavior includes the time period the mentee hasavoided criminal behavior.
 17. A computer system for providing incentiveto mentors of at-risk mentees, comprising a computer processor; and oneor more tangible computer readable media accessible by the computerprocessor, wherein the one or more tangible computer readable mediacomprise instructions that, when executed by the computer processor,cause the computer processor to perform: determining a mentee's behaviorand progress in a period of time; determining the mentee's income andincome tax payments during the same period of time or a different periodof time; and calculating a financial incentive for the mentee's mentor,wherein the amount of the financial incentive is calculated based on thementee's behavior and income tax payment during the period of time usinga compensation matrix stored in the one or more tangible computerreadable media.
 18. The computer system of claim 17, wherein the one ormore tangible computer readable media comprise instructions that, whenexecuted by the computer processors, cause the computer processors toperform: receiving, via a user interface, the mentee's progress reportsafter the establishment of a mentor-mentee relationship.
 19. Thecomputer system of claim 17, wherein the mentee's behavior includes thetime period the mentee has avoided criminal behavior.
 20. The computersystem of claim 17, wherein the amount of the financial incentive isbased on a share of the mentee's income tax payment, wherein the size ofthe share is determined by the severity of the mentee's risk factors andpotential costs of crime, prison and/or welfare to the society.